Old hands or non-posters.

[cee-dee]

Come on old hands, how about coming back and making some interesting and constructive posts?

OK, so it seems certain things can't be said but that applies in many places and situations too. Being deliberately confrontationally aggressive won't hack it here now but surely there's some interesting things to say or make comment about?

To non-posters I say please post. I see all the views and wonder who the viewer is that's reading but not posting. Why not?

[cee-dee]

Ah Logs, I think the above is a relevant comment to your latest post?

[logbox]

Really? in your opinion maybe.

[cee-dee]

Of course..........

[logbox]

Is there any other?

[cee-dee]

No.

[*.*..lola..*.*]

---

@cee-dee wrote:

I think what's really turned off a lot of previous posters is the multitude of wanna-be commedians who seem to think it's fun to turn any thread ("serious" or not) in to a slap-stick routine either by making stupid remarks or posting stupid pics all of which have no bearing on the thread in question and couple that with personal comments/insults, direct or veiled and a lot of the reasons for not posting are there.

---

Maybe it should be up to each individual OP to lay down the ground rules for their OWN threads instead of one or two posters trying to dictate how they think everyone on the whole forum should behave.

Personally I like a bit of humour but I can understand that some posters might not. I can honestly say that until this moment, I wasn't even aware that you found it all so annoying CeeDee? Maybe that is the case with others too?

As the 'host' of a discussion, I don't think it would be unreasonable for an OP to tell other contributors to stay on topic or to stop posting silly pics/comments etc. as long as it's said in a friendly non-patronising way.

It would certainly be friendlier and more constructive than just blanking people and ignoring their contributions I guess.

[artful_dodgings]

First class post from Fallen Archie @ #58. Erudite and succinct, and I have subsequently Kudo'd him for it.

Seems to me that as in a real life scenario, there are also members of social media forums - and I'm not specifically referring to this one - who think that their opinions, thoughts, ideas, suggestions, etc, are the only ones that have any validation.They are intransigent and immovable in their thought processes, to the detriment of anyone else who has a stance which is diametrically opposed and at variance with their own. Other people's are simply denigrated and cast aside as unimportant. Maybe these people - where a forum is concerned - should start one up, exclusively for themselves. They could then banter, talk, debate, argue, and discuss until their heart's content with themselves, and no one would have access to their own private bubble.

And what may I be so bold as to ask is wrong with, however profoundly deep and meaningful the thread/topic, is injecting a bit of humour into proceedings ? It happens in the Houses of Parliament and the Oxford Debating Society, so why not on here ? Someone will always steer it back from the tangent and on to the right track, for those who are offended by the audacity of it all.

Or maybe those individuals mentioned above should simply step down from their high moral ground and take stock. The view to the Great Wall of China isn't all that great after all.

[cee-dee]

There should be no need for anyone to "lay down ground rules", all anyone has to do is respond in a nice manner and choose carefully where to post unfunny remarks and silly pics. Why don't they start their own threads instead of spoiling those of others?

It's surely quite OK to post something funny or pics/animations where it's obviously relevant to what's going down on the thread but wading in with a derogatory remark aimed at a poster or pics etc which are again aimed at a poster only succeeds in either encoraging more of the same or puts off other posters.

[fallen-archie]

I cannot recall any reference to Rommel, I have no doubt that things may have been said in frustration or even spite but regretted afterwards. One thing I have learnt is that holding a grudge or living with a chip on your shoulder leads to a miserable existence.

Sadly the fact some feel the need to be right or possibly righteous can rub others up the wrong way.

As you point out those large highly artistic sigs can disrupt the flow of a thread for some yet many forms of social media have threads with multiple conversations taking place including ones which feature jpegs or videos. So it is all one big subjective mess. Modern fonts, poor formatting, laboured points, questionable theories, smart or dumb remarks these are all part and parcel of life in the 21st century. Like it or lump it what you see is what you get. 

[cee-dee]

In the H of C, the Speaker controls the proceedings and has chucked out those who step way out of line, others have simply been rebuked and people trying to go way off topic have been silenced..... Some of the idiotic things said by Members have been howled down by the rest but we can't do those things here so the H of C is hardly comparable!

Now a discussion with points for and against the subject by many different posters are fine, often highly controversial but very interesting nevertheless. (Who dares start a thread on UFOs or Religion?)

[cee-dee]

Logs will remind you about Rommel.

The huge sig pics on here completely destroyed many threads where the users made very short posts with the enormous sig pic on every one. When you got two or three users with them coming out with just "lol", "roflmao" and other similar acronyms, the thread subject was lost.

[artful_dodgings]

If anyone doesn't like gifs, pics, and images, might I suggest they turn off their HTML.

Sorted.

[right-then-petal]

[cee-dee]

 

[fallen-archie]

That won't be necessary If I wanted to dwell on past I would do so for reasons that would either give me pleasure or offer a meaningful outcome of benefit to someone or something. If we can forgive our real enemies then we can certainly ignore the imagined ones.

[artful_dodgings]

---

@cee-dee wrote:

In the H of C, the Speaker controls the proceedings and has chucked out those who step way out of line, others have simply been rebuked and people trying to go way off topic have been silenced..... Some of the idiotic things said by Members have been howled down by the rest but we can't do those things here so the H of C is hardly comparable!

---

Referring back to the thread topic 'Old Hands or Non Posters', judging be your registration date, you come under the former. Therefore, couldn't you adopt the mantle of Speaker of the House ? If members are getting out of hand, you could always type in in upper case - and even highlight it for effect - ORDER ! ORDER ! !

Failing that you could always type, if anyone is trying to be a stand-up comedian, *howls of derisory laughter from the back of the House*

Anyway I'm off out for a Big Mac, completely ignoring the edict from the WHO. (Not the band, the other lot).

Good Night each.

[Anonymous]

You wanted old hands, so you got some...just not the ones you wanted.....

[cee-dee]

I was half expecting some commedian with Max Bygraves "You need hands"...........

[shms23]

s'funny you should mention that ^^^^^^^^^

[logbox]

Bit concerned at these two lines extracted from two of C.D's posts, unlike you C.D, explanation?

at a poster only succeeds in either encoraging more of the same or puts off other posters.

I was half expecting some commedian with Max Bygraves "You need hands"...........